Hammond vs Tevreden

[Royal_jimmy]

Now Brian has been in his role for over a year, I am interested to debate about who's been a better DoF for us.

Squeaky got us some fantastic transfer fees for the club (Tevreden has only sold Tish for about £3-4M).

I think in terms of buying players, Tevreden has been more impressive albeit our pockets are a bit deeper now than when Hammond was DoF. I think that Tommy Smith saga back in 2009 definitely lost some points.

I still Tevreden is a bit behind squeaky still as he's only been at the club for a year and a half but I can't stop but be impressed by some of the transfer deals he's done for signing quality players. I'm interested to see how well he negotiates should we get a big offer for someone like Liam Kelly or Liam Moore.

[genome]

Brian needs to get us promoted before we can really compare him.

[Snowflake Royal]

Why would you compare someone who has been in the role a year with someone who built the role from scratch and was in it for about 10 years or more?

The idea is just weird. I mean for a start, you can't really judge the true impact of a signing in just one year. Some signings are meant to have an instant impact for sure, but others are slowly developed over time. Some have one good season but turn out to be failures. DoFs can't be properly judged after a year, they need three or five or ten. How do they do at succession planning? Success maintenance? Rebuilding after failure?

And in any case, why does one have to be better than the other. Why can't they both just be appreciated for what they've done?

[Nameless]

Why state that Teverenden has only sold Tish ?
In the last few days we sold Samuel and last summer we sold Norwood......

Agree it's a pointless question though. Like asking who have been the better owners, the Thai's or the Chinese.....

[blueroyals]

RE: transfers - Hammond seemed reluctant to sign foreign players (understandable given past experiences tbh) and I think that held us back a little bit in his final years. We weren't able to compete in the domestic market with some of the ridiculous transfer fees.

You can't judge them on transfers alone. Tevreden has a clear vision for the club in terms of playing style and recruitment. Hammond was all over the place - Rodgers to McD to Adkins who all had very different playing styles and wanted different players to match it.

Director of football isn't just about wheeling & dealing these days.

[Lower West]

Different era. Impossible to make comparisons. History however will say that Hammond was instrumental in establishing Reading as the club we are today. Come a long way in the past 2 decades.

[maffff]

Brian has only had a January and two half windows so far. Way too soon to judge.

Also, we now have Gourlay, so we may not know going forward what's him and what isn't.

Only possible question mark around Brian so far is was the Ali clause his naivety, but in likelihood that probably existed from when we got him on a free which was before his time.

Plus given fees mooted for the Blackburn keeper, Randolph and Darlow it seems we've done very very well getting Mannone so quick and so cheap.

[Forbury Lion]

Why would you compare someone who has been in the role a year with someone who built the role from scratch and was in it for about 10 years or more?

Plus, Nigel Howe has taken over some of the duties and responsibilities that were previously performed by Howe.

[genome]

Hammond is all good and everything, but is he about to drop the sickest album of 2017? I don't think so

[CountryRoyal]

[maffff]

Hammond is all good and everything, but is he about to drop the sickest album of 2017? I don't think so

Prepping to drop the sickest transfer this window more like

[tidus_mi2]

To put an argument against Hammond, while normally being good at squeezing every penny out of a player sale, does anyone else get the feeling that the transfer fee for Gylfi, in hindsight was a bit lacklustre? This is of course seeing Swansea rejecting £40m for him and while transfer fees have exploded recently, it does make the ~£6.5m we got for him seem quite tame, especially for a midfielder who had just scored 16 in the Championship.

[genome]

At the time, it was a decent fee. He was still relatively unproven, had no Premier League experience, and that was before the ridiculous inflation the Championship has seen in the last 2 or 3 years.

If he had had his 2009/10 season with us in 2016/17, and we were going to sell him now, we'd easily get £15m+ in this market.

[Lower West]

To put an argument against Hammond, while normally being good at squeezing every penny out of a player sale, does anyone else get the feeling that the transfer fee for Gylfi, in hindsight was a bit lacklustre? This is of course seeing Swansea rejecting £40m for him and while transfer fees have exploded recently, it does make the ~£6.5m we got for him seem quite tame, especially for a midfielder who had just scored 16 in the Championship.

Never made the grade at Spurs though. Shame as will always remember that night at WBA. Good player. Not a great as his potential once suggested.

[tidus_mi2]

To put an argument against Hammond, while normally being good at squeezing every penny out of a player sale, does anyone else get the feeling that the transfer fee for Gylfi, in hindsight was a bit lacklustre? This is of course seeing Swansea rejecting £40m for him and while transfer fees have exploded recently, it does make the ~£6.5m we got for him seem quite tame, especially for a midfielder who had just scored 16 in the Championship.

Never made the grade at Spurs though. Shame as will always remember that night at WBA. Good player. Not a great as his potential once suggested.

He got frozen out at Hoffenheim as well, I wonder if that screwed us in terms of add-ons and potential sell on fees.

[TiagoIlori]

Hammond obviously had a huge impact on the club and over the last few years, Sir John Madjeski's men started getting on a bit- the era seems to have ended now Gourlay has come in and is probably for the best that we now have Tevreden leading what looks like a very exciting project, so in the modern era I'd rather have Tevreden, but to say who is better full stop is too soon, especially as Tevreden has been here for barely 18 months and Hammond was here for 13 years!

[TiagoIlori]

Hammond obviously had a huge impact on the club and over the last few years, Sir John Madjeski's men started getting on a bit- the era seems to have ended now Gourlay has come in and is probably for the best that we now have Tevreden leading what looks like a very exciting project, so in the modern era I'd rather have Tevreden, but to say who is better full stop is too soon, especially as Tevreden has been here for barely 18 months and Hammond was here for 13 years!

This has aged well

[Forbury Lion]

I think Brian would have struggled to do the job Nicky did under the circumstances the club found their selves in with regards to having to raise funds, spend frugally (The Reading Way). Also, some of Hammonds role moved over to Nigel Howe - things like negotiating contracts and stuff, I don't know if it has moved back to DoF area now Howe is not involved or if Gorlay has it covered.